Um ... how does the article support your idea? I'm sorry, but what's clear is that everyone who's had those shots doesn't get autism. If kids are getting autism without vaccinations (or the ingredients purported to be the problem), that shoots THAT theory out of the water. I'm with the theory that it's slightly possible that there are kids with rare genetic issues that make them more sensitive to certain chemical cocktails. We should further genetic identification and analysis before we start taking things off the market that save lives.

Knock and the door shall open. It's not my fault if you don't like the decor.

The fuzzy minds have legislated that there is no connection between immunizations and autism. How about some scientific proof rather than legal mumbo jumbo.

There never was any scientific proof linking the two. Lots of wild claims, but no scientific proof. It was all made up by a couple of British lawyers that paid some "doctors" to publish what they BELIEVED was a link. As ou can see, The Lancet has since retracted that article. All the claims you see about a connection stem from that article.

So, in other words; there is not now, and most likely never will be, a connection between autism and vaccinations. If you believe there is, then present the evidence. Now, that evidence must be scientific in nature, not more claims, no a maybe, not a what if, not anything about a conspiracy, but just plain facts.

Dave - Just a Man in the Mountains.

There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there always has been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge. Isaac Asimov

The fuzzy minds have legislated that there is no connection between immunizations and autism. How about some scientific proof rather than legal mumbo jumbo.

As a basic course in philosophy of science could teach you, it is not possible to offer "scientific proof" for the absence of a connection. Failure despite repeated effort to find evidence for the presence of that something must suffice. And as mountainman pointed out, such is the case - so, the legislators are free to legislate, scientifically speaking there's no reason for them not to.